amra@ihlpa.UUCP (s. aldrich) (05/07/85)
> Why is it that some groups which are obvious targets of discrimination > get much more attention and outside support than others? For instance, > many rallies occur these days against apartheid in South-Africa, in > which a great number of the participants are not Black. On the other > hand, such groups as the Jews or the gays not only do not receive > support from the outside, but very little from the inside too. It does > not have anything to do with the intensity of the ``oppression,'' for > that to which, for example, the Jews of the Arab countries or the > Soviet Union are subjected to is no picnic. > > One common characteristic of these particular two groups is their > potential invisibility; in other words, in most cases, no particular > feature distinguishing them from the general population. [Aside: those > discriminating against them look for any imaginary distinguishing > feature--for there would be no reason to discriminate if there was no > difference]. > > This might explain why outsiders to these groups are reluctant to > associate with them in support, lest they be mistakenly take as members > of these groups, with all associated stigmata and opprobrium. This is > why it is not rare to read or hear such sentences as: ``as a Gentile, I > think...'' in support of Jews. A friend was telling me yesterday how > uncomfortable he felt when talking in support of gays and how he always > made sure (in subtle ways) that he not be taken for one. A white > person in a rally for blacks is somehow relatively safer than in a > hypothetical rally for Jews (or gays). > > This may also explain the reluctance some of the members of these > groups to react openly to discrimination against their own group: they > can hope to be unnoticed, to blend in the background, and delude > themselves that *they* won't be the target, for nobody will notice > *them*. As to the Blacks -- they don't have that choice. > > Another possible reason for the interest in S.A. may be some glamour > attached to it. Or rather, a tiredness with other less exciting but > very hard problems. How many are concerned these days with the famine > in Africa? *That* problem won't be solved by rallies. If this view is > correct, it may be that the interest of the public will soon shift yet > to another cause, in search of novelty, without having solved this one, > too. [Please note that I am in no way saying that fighting apartheid is no > worthy cause, I am speaking of uncommited attitudes] {.."A house is just a pile of Stuff with a cover on it..." :-} Allow me to add my comments to this discussion. I have often voiced my "opposition" to various stands/positions taken on the "net-universe", not to mention the "real world", often as an "outsider". Some of my reasons for doing so are as follows: 1) I object to certain "ideals" on humanitarian grounds, not to mention socio-political ones. 2) As a W.A.S.Z-B. (White Anglo Saxon Zen-Baptist :-), I feel a certain amount of "obligation" to society to "correct" the mistakes of the past. By this I mean remembering the past "inequities" perpetrated upon various groups by members of MY GROUP and trying my best to make sure that it does Not happen again. Also to try to take the "responsibility" for MY OWN ACTIONS and/or ATTITUDES in MY LIFETIME. After all, I can't Erase the past, but I can strive to ensure a better world for the FUTURE by trying to "minimize/eliminate" the *attitudes* which lead to the injustice in the first place! 3) I STRONGLY OBJECT to racial/religious/political/social "persecution" of ANY GROUP and/or INDIVIDUAL, including the likes of Don Black! If the "ideal" of *true* spiritual/social/economic freedom is ever going to be realized, EVERYONE MUST HAVE AN EQUAL VOICE in the discussion! Even if they ARE "out to lunch", at least they will have have had the "opportunity" to make an Ass of themselves, if they so choose. However, there is NO obligation for anyone to agree with these "stated beliefs" either. There must be tolerance for DISSENT! 4) I have often heard it said that there was little or no opposition to various policies/beliefs/attitudes from members of the "white-male" and/or "gentile" and/or "hetrosexual" and/or etc... to the past, and present, harrassment of Non-Wasp's. I just want to let people know that there are "some of us" who object to these attitudes of our race and/or social/religious group! Well, enough rambling for now, if you have ANY COMMENTS please feel free to contact me. Even if we may "dis-agree" on certain points. Peace & Best Wishes From The Atoms Currently Associated As: Steve Aldrich (ihnp4!ihlpa!amra) <== NOTE NEW ADDRESS PLEASE! "Is it tomorrow, or just the end of time?" Jimi Hendrix